High court ruling aallowing Eircom proceed with cutting off internet access

token56

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2010/0416/breaking56.html

So is this actually going to have a big effect, as far as I can see its only for p2p traffic.

Also exactly how is it going to work? Does a company first tell Eircom we think this IP is downloading illegal material go get them. Or does Eircom make the call on whether they are downloading illegal material?

Damo123

Eircom shouldnt be able to do that. I mean what happens if your neighbour happens to know abit about computers and cracks your wep.... or your wpa for that matter and uses your connection to download this stuff without your knowledge. Surely they cant punish you for your neighbours wrong doings.

token56

Damo123 wrote: »

Eircom shouldnt be able to do that. I mean what happens if your neighbour happens to know abit about computers and cracks your wep.... or your wpa for that matter and uses your connection to download this stuff without your knowledge. Surely they cant punish you for your neighbours wrong doings.

Well its your internet, so I suppose its up to you to keep it secure, granted the majority of the general public probably aren't actually tech aware enough to make sure it is secured. Its particularly silly with eircom because the way WEP are generated for their wirless routers is ridiculous, although I'm not if its still the same now, I'd hope not.

But I personally think its fair enough to expect a person to be responsible for their own Internet.

KyussBishop

The right to be identified with and to reasonably exploit one’s own original creative endeavour I regard as a human right.

Lets forget the right to 'freedom of expression' then, I guess (in this case internet access), or 'innocent until proven guilty' in the case of:
(i) Someone hacking your WiFi
(ii) A virus on your computer downloading copyrighted material
etc.

I suppose the rights of copyright holders and recording companies etc. should take precedence over those of everyone else?
C*nts.

IrishTonyO

I reckon this will be appealed, hasn't the EU recently declared access to the internet a basic human right?
I can't see how a private company can take away this right, without bringing it to court.

Eoin_Sheehy

I hate eircom for caving in those multi-million b**tards in IRMA. for them this has nothing to do with the artist it's to do with the record labels losing some coffers, I've confidence this will be
appealed at an EU level.

Also has anyone actual been caught and warned by Eircom?

I reckon this will be appealed, hasn't the EU recently declared access to the internet a basic human right?
I can't see how a private company can take away this right, without bringing it to court.

What's worse is that IRMA isn't even a company, it's an organisation, which opens up the question of an organisation of prudent biddies claiming they don't want p0rn on the internet and forcing Eircom to introduce Australian-like bans and censorship on the internet.

Damo123

token56 wrote: »

Well its your internet, so I suppose its up to you to keep it secure, granted the majority of the general public probably aren't actually tech aware enough to make sure it is secured. Its particularly silly with eircom because the way WEP are generated for their wirless routers is ridiculous, although I'm not if its still the same now, I'd hope not.

But I personally think its fair enough to expect a person to be responsible for their own Internet.

I know what your saying.... but unless something has changed in the past few years then I dont think its fair that somebody is responsible for their own wireless internet (in the sense of neighbours hijacking it).

WEP = no security

WPA = some security... have you seen how fast you can crack a wpa when you use the GPU instead of the CPU... Just try it.... its not hard to do, doesnt take long to set-up and trust me you wont believe the results

MAC Filtering = no security.... its not hard to forge a fake mac on your packets.

Once wireless is involved there is always room for a little war-driving....

And then as you said alot of people arent very techie minded anyway so when they get the letter from eircom they probably wont have a clue whats going on.

cian1500ww

Not surprised this has been brought in, been prepared for it

TheDriver

Presume ISPs who resell Eircom's product aren't affected by this rubbish?

Eoin_Sheehy

TheDriver wrote: »

Presume ISPs who resell Eircom's product aren't affected by this rubbish?

They never are they've got balls and won't be told what to do by IRMA!

token56

Damo123 wrote: »

I know what your saying.... but unless something has changed in the past few years then I dont think its fair that somebody is responsible for their own wireless internet (in the sense of neighbours hijacking it).

WEP = no security

WPA = some security... have you seen how fast you can crack a wpa when you use the GPU instead of the CPU... Just try it.... its not hard to do, doesnt take long to set-up and trust me you wont believe the results

MAC Filtering = no security.... its not hard to forge a fake mac on your packets.

Once wireless is involved there is always room for a little war-driving....

And then as you said alot of people arent very techie minded anyway so when they get the letter from eircom they probably wont have a clue whats going on.

I appreciate what you are saying and on further reflection I do agree that once personal wireless routers etc come into the equation then realistically any level of reasonable security someone places on their network can be hacked by a knowledgeable person. I suppose Eircom or an ISP would always argue that the number of people able to and willing to this would be relatively small but on the counter side most people simply have WEP keys and as you say thats no protection at all.

I suppose beyond constantly monitoring all incoming and outgoing traffic on your router and checking over this for any anomalies there isn't a huge amount more anyone can do. This option, well is not realistic as it is impractical for most tech aware people let alone the general public. Although I imagine it is possible for some application which could be designed to detect such anomalies and report them to the user. Hmmm, interesting.

But what it boils down to is that there will always be an element of risk associated with wireless networks in terms of someone else being able to use it for illegal purposes. Is this risk enough to say that IP addresses should not be allowed used as evidence by ISP's, well this court ruling is obviously saying its fine to use them.

Thinking about it I'm undecided now, there are a few different elements to take into account but I do think there is a way that this issue could be minimized as much as possible regarding the monitoring thing which could be practical, the question then is who should be responsible for implementing this the user or the ISP.

Damo123

token56 wrote: »

I appreciate what you are saying and on further reflection I do agree that once personal wireless routers etc come into the equation then realistically any level of reasonable security someone places on their network can be hacked by a knowledgeable person. I suppose Eircom or an ISP would always argue that the number of people able to and willing to this would be relatively small but on the counter side most people simply have WEP keys and as you say thats no protection at all.

I suppose beyond constantly monitoring all incoming and outgoing traffic on your router and checking over this for any anomalies there isn't a huge amount more anyone can do. This option, well is not realistic as it is impractical for most tech aware people let alone the general public. Although I imagine it is possible for some application which could be designed to detect such anomalies and report them to the user. Hmmm, interesting.

But what it boils down to is that there will always be an element of risk associated with wireless networks in terms of someone else being able to use it for illegal purposes. Is this risk enough to say that IP addresses should not be allowed used as evidence by ISP's, well this court ruling is obviously saying its fine to use them.

Thinking about it I'm undecided now, there are a few different elements to take into account but I do think there is a way that this issue could be minimized as much as possible regarding the monitoring thing which could be practical, the question then is who should be responsible for implementing this the user or the ISP.

Well obviously Eircom have thought about this already. And have a solution. It will be interesting to see.

But in my opinion I dont think eircom will target the average p2p user or the odd torrenter.... Id say this is more or less a way to get at the big guys. The ones who do it 24/7. And if thats the case, Id say that if the person kept protesting innocence then there would be enough "circumstantial evidence" to start confiscating laptops to examine them for evidence...... And Eircom would only have to do this a few times until people start getting the picture.... most guilty people would rather cut their losses then perhaps lose their stuff and risk court.

thats just my 2 cents.

Eoin_Sheehy

Damo123 wrote: »

Well obviously Eircom have thought about this already. And have a solution. It will be interesting to see.

But in my opinion I dont think eircom will target the average p2p user or the odd torrenter.... Id say this is more or less a way to get at the big guys. The ones who do it 24/7. And if thats the case, Id say that if the person kept protesting innocence then there would be enough "circumstantial evidence" to start confiscating laptops to examine them for evidence...... And Eircom would only have to do this a few times until people start getting the picture.... most guilty people would rather cut their losses then perhaps lose their stuff and risk court.

thats just my 2 cents.

TBH I think Eircom infact really don't want to comply with this at all and I think they'll do a really half-assed job, and just catch a few people so that they'll keep the IRMA happy.

dunworth1

i wouldnt know to much about this but i had a quick search and found this (BOLD)

form Wikipedia

Problems with file sharing in Europe have not gone undocumented. A March 2010 study entitled “Building a Digital Economy: The Importance of Saving Jobs in the EU's Creative Industries” published figures stating that 1.2 million jobs could be lost in the European Union and up to €240 billion in retail income, by 2015. [45]

April 2008 saw the European Parliament block attempts to criminalize file sharing by individuals, moreover the idea of cutting off internet access of offenders was also thrown out. 314 MEPs voted in favour of an amendment to the Telecoms Package (2007) to abandon these proposals with 297 voting against. [46]

November 2009 saw the European Parliament vote again on further changes to the Telecoms Package. In regards to file sharing MEPs agreed to compromise and protect user's rights. A European Parliament statment read "A user's internet access may be restricted, if necessary and proportionate, only after a fair and impartial procedure including the user's right to be heard." EU members will have until May 2011 to implement these changes in their own laws. [47]

Before Britain introduced the Digital Economy Act 2010, France paved the way with the Creation and Internet Bill which was passed in January 2010 after a lengthy battle in the French parliament. The law is enforced by an agency called the Higher Authority for the Distribution of Works and the Protection of Copyright on the Internet HADOPI law.

Under the law those accused of copyright infringement via the Internet are issued with a warning letter, then a second warning letter. Breaches for a third time are met with fines or, in some cases, this graduated response results in the user’s internet connection being terminated.

In comparison to the UK’s Digital Economy Act 2010, in France a judge has to sign-off on any account suspensions as opposed to the agency enforcing the law.

The bill’s supporters in France believe the bill is a model for other countries around the world that want to protect their creative industries and make clear to ordinary web-users that not everything is for free.[48] President Nicolas Sarkozy and his wife, the model and singer Carla Bruni, were supporters of the legislation.

Those opposing the bill have objected to its implementation on the grounds that it will neither prevent file-sharing nor turn pirates into legitimate users. Furthermore, they have argued that disconnecting a citizen’s internet access is unfair given the role the Web fulfils both commercially and politically. [49]

It has been reported that Spain has one of the highest rates of illegal file-sharing in Europe. [50] In a twelve month period it was reported that there were 2.4 billion illegal downloads of copyrighted works including music, video games, software and films in Spain. Statistics indicate that the figure for the Spanish population using file sharing sites is 30%, which is double the European average of 15%.[51] This has had a devastating impact on the entertainment industry. For example in 2003 10 new Spanish artists appeared in the top 50 album charts, however in 2009 no new Spanish artists featured in the chart. Due to the high number of illegal downloads purchases of albums by Spanish artist dropped by two- thirds over a period of five years leading up to 2010.[52] Despite the problems endured by the entertainment industry, file sharing and torrent websites were ruled to be legal in Spain in March 2010. The judge who was responsible for the court ruling stated that “P2P networks are mere conduits for the transmission of data between Internet users, and on this basis they do not infringe rights protected by Intellectual Property laws”.[53]

m

goat2

would some one put this in plain english to me
i am not getting the message here
on what conditions can eircom cut off a persons connection
is it to do with pornography, what is it
is it someone hacking others

IrishTonyO

goat2 wrote: »

would some one put this in plain english to me
i am not getting the message here
on what conditions can eircom cut off a persons connection
is it to do with pornography, what is it
is it someone hacking others

For downloading illegal content, i.e films, songs, tv shows, applications etc without paying for them

Eoin_Sheehy

And yet still many bills have passed through various Parliaments in the EU, unimpeded by the European Parliament. This case is less stable as it's not a Parliament bill.

Eoin_Sheehy

goat2 wrote: »

would some one put this in plain english to me
i am not getting the message here
on what conditions can eircom cut off a persons connection
is it to do with pornography, what is it
is it someone hacking others

No I means if you download music illegally for sites like The Pirate Bay, IsoHunt and any other Torrent site. Eircom will start sending you warning letters, slowing down your internet and in repeat offenders Eircom cut you off, so you can continue watching your porn!

IrishTonyO

Eoin_Sheehy wrote: »

No I means if you download music illegally for sites like The Pirate Bay, IsoHunt and any other Torrent site. Eircom will start sending you warning letters, slowing down your internet and in repeat offenders Eircom cut you off, so you can continue watching your porn!

as long as it's paid for

Stky10

Damo123 wrote: »

WEP = no security

WPA = some security... have you seen how fast you can crack a wpa when you use the GPU instead of the CPU... Just try it.... its not hard to do, doesnt take long to set-up and trust me you wont believe the results

MAC Filtering = no security.... its not hard to forge a fake mac on your packets.

WPA is flawed only if you're using TKIP instead of AES. If I'm using WPA2 with AES and a good 20 character passphrase, you'd need a lot more than a GPU to crack it any time this year.

As for WEP/MAC-filtering... Yes, any techie worth their salt can crack it, but how many of them are there out there to the number of people who wouldn't have a clue?. Its really not worth the effort when there's still so many Eircom AP's with the degraded standard WEP keys out there.

TheDriver

i thought its only going to be music and not movies etc?

hightower1

IrishTonyO wrote: »

I reckon this will be appealed, hasn't the EU recently declared access to the internet a basic human right?
I can't see how a private company can take away this right, without bringing it to court.

Yes it is a basic human right.... like the right to freedom.... but that doesn't mean you cant be locked up for breaking the law... copyright infringement is the law.

IrishTonyO

hightower1 wrote: »

Yes it is a basic human right.... like the right to freedom.... but that doesn't mean you cant be locked up for breaking the law... copyright infringement is the law.

I know that but Eircom is a private company and is not the state or the judicial system, they are talking about stopping your internet access without taking you to court, which is a totally different matter.

antocann

TheDriver wrote: »

i thought its only going to be music and not movies etc?

its only supposed to be music but time will tell, also p2p sharing is legal so dunno what the outcome of this is going to be , i think it will result in eircom loosing customers to their rivals

goat2

Eoin_Sheehy wrote: »

No I means if you download music illegally for sites like The Pirate Bay, IsoHunt and any other Torrent site. Eircom will start sending you warning letters, slowing down your internet and in repeat offenders Eircom cut you off, so you can continue watching your porn!

sorry i do not watch porn
just think i dont need it

FloatingVoter

Hilarious. Anyone seriously downloading 24/7 shagged off to newsgroups long ago. Anyone left after the pirate bay fiasco is either using their connection honestly or needs a seedbox / VPN / new ISP. Whichever suits.

scruff monkey

goat2 wrote: »

would some one put this in plain english to me
i am not getting the message here
on what conditions can eircom cut off a persons connection
is it to do with pornography, what is it
is it someone hacking others

The record/movie companies will claim that you illegally downloaded their material,
they will then request that eircom cut you off,
eircom will do a 3 strikes/warnings and you're out

i suspect for the most part for maximum publicity/ease of doing it that the low hanging fruit such as the kazaa type networks will be targeted first as they are still the largest group amongst users of a non technical bent. People using ip blockers/trackerless torrents are a little harder to pin down (not much harder but they will want offerings quickly)

It's important to note that Eircom are not the ones doing this, it's under threat of litigation that they will cut off the subscribers, the actual reporting of downloading
will be handled by the lackeys of the music/movie companies.

As others have pointed out, some have already switched to newsgroups etc..., there's a tech arms race happening on this, they will cut off one route of downloading
and another will take over as the primary method, same old same old...

yomamasflavour

High court ruling allowing Eircom proceed with cutting off its own revenue stream.

Hmm, what's wrong with that statement? Especially when you consider the ~ €3,300,000,000 (somewhere around there) debt that Eircom is carrying.

It seems laughable that they'd start cutting off family users using Limewire, Kazaa etc.
I suspect Eircom will try to appear to follow through with it, but in reality won't actually do anything.

Bodhan

You know what to do? Eircom aren't that good as an ISP anyway. The caps, the speed, the expense. Do what Ireland is crap at and vote with your feet...change ISP to someone else.
Stop complaining to each other and take action.

peace out

thefishone

What gets me about this is,what if one member of a household is downloading stuff illegally and they cut them off,then are you not punishing the whole family for the crimes of one member,if a person commits a crime,we don't send the whole family to prison.......or am I missing something

Kevin!

will they be monitoring rapidshare usage? as It's not p2p

FloatingVoter

Kevin! wrote: »

will they be monitoring rapidshare usage? as It's not p2p

The issue involves what you're downloading not how you're downloading it. Filesharing and using p2p networks are completely legal. Its the downloading of copyrighted content that is the issue. So if you're using rapidshare to download copyrighted material then yes, the case does concern you.

Scotty #

antocann wrote: »

i think it will result in eircom loosing customers to their rivals

Eircom are just being used as a test case in the high court. Once approved there, I guarantee all other ISP's will follow suit. No ISP is going to be seen to facilitate illegal activity.

Internet access in Ireland (or the EU) is not a human right. It is in France, Greece, and one or two other EU countries. Anyway, it's irrelevant, having the right to access something does not mean you can use it illegally.

The companies who have taken this case... EMI, Sony, Universal and Warner have said they are not interested in prosecuting individuals. They just want a stop put to the activity. Personally I think the fact that you get two warning first is extremely lenient of them.

By the way, Warner actually own uTorrent. I wonder is that how they had a big list of Irish IP addresses of illegal downloaders with them on court?

Mr Justice Charleton ruled that IP addresses of suspected illegal downloaders in the possession of the record companies who intend to give them to Eircom are not “personal data” or sensitive personal data such as required the companies to comply with data protection issues.

Eoin_Sheehy wrote:

They never are they've got balls and won't be told what to do by IRMA!

LOL! Eircom complying with Irish Law and International Copyright Law is 'not having the balls'? They may not do with IRMA tell them - but they WILL do what the high court tell them!

limklad

thefishone wrote: »

What gets me about this is,what if one member of a household is downloading stuff illegally and they cut them off,then are you not punishing the whole family for the crimes of one member,if a person commits a crime,we don't send the whole family to prison.......or am I missing something

If someone hack your connection via wifi or by the modem through externally connection and uses your computer/modem to relay illegal stuff, your are liable for the illegal download for it is your responsible to secure your connection. nearly most of the population cannot secure their internet connection, even they major companies are having difficulty in securing theirs as devious programmers are always finding and exploiting loop holes in software.

THAT MEANS IF YOUR CONNECTION IS TARGETED THEN YOUR ARE SCREWED. Saying that hackers are exploiting is no defence to the isp's and IRMA.

potsy86

glad i got rid of eircom last week rip of merchants moved to a new provider faster cheaper and unlimeted download useage eircom is a semi state company so has to give in to that sort of stuff banning people for downloading

IrishTonyO

potsy86 wrote: »

glad i got rid of eircom last week rip of merchants moved to a new provider faster cheaper and unlimeted download useage eircom is a semi state company so has to give in to that sort of stuff banning people for downloading

Eircom has not been a semi state company since it became Eircom and not Telecom Eireann. It's a private company

yomamasflavour

limklad wrote: »

If someone hack your connection via wifi or by the modem through externally connection and uses your computer/modem to relay illegal stuff, your are liable for the illegal download for it is your responsible to secure your connection. nearly most of the population cannot secure their internet connection, even they major companies are having difficulty in securing theirs as devious programmers are always finding and exploiting loop holes in software.

THAT MEANS IF YOUR CONNECTION IS TARGETED THEN YOUR ARE SCREWED. Saying that hackers are exploiting is no defence to the isp's and IRMA.

Not necessarily true.
http://torrentfreak.com/ifpi-loses-yet-again-in-p2p-wireless-defense-case-081007/

potsy86

IrishTonyO wrote: »

Eircom has not been a semi state company since it became Eircom and not Telecom Eireann. It's a private company

my mistake just heard people saying it so i tought it was true i stand corrected

PogMoThoin

FloatingVoter wrote: »

The issue involves what you're downloading not how you're downloading it. Filesharing and using p2p networks are completely legal. Its the downloading of copyrighted content that is the issue. So if you're using rapidshare to download copyrighted material then yes, the case does concern you.

With p2p Your ip is visible to whoever joins the torrent, which is what they do and record all the other ip addresses, they aren't doing anything illegal as they own the content. Rapidshare is different, its a 1:1 connection between You and the server, nobody else sees what You're downloading, only the ISP can if they sniff Your traffic, but thats illegal

PDD

I thought this idea of a three strikes rule had been thrown out of the top European court for human rights? As Dunworth1 pointed out the Telecoms package states "A user's internet access may be restricted, if necessary and proportionate, only after a fair and impartial procedure including the user's right to be heard." EU members will have until May 2011 to implement these changes in their own laws. [47]

If thats the case then is the judge deliberately ignoring this to placate local influences from IRMA and Eircom and give them breathing space until the appropriate legislation is brought forward here in Ireland?

For me its got nothing to do with file sharing although I am an advocate of copy left. The fact is that this is essentially allowing ISP's and others to act on the basis of guilty until proven innocent, to the best of my knowledge there is no due process or vetting of any evidence for allegations laid against a user. Once an allegation is made by of copyright infringement Eircom will not bother their arse to check a thing and will simply comply with the request (if your thinking otherwise your off in lala land, the will do the bare minimum to appear to be compliant but thats it)

As an aside of the fact that this strips away a persons rights to due process as many people have pointed out here replicating an IP is relative childs play. So not only is there potential that the only evidence being used against you (your IP address) can be easily forged there will be no review of this information. This just reeks of cronyisim and is wide open for corruption.

If anyone followed the Pirate Bay trial last year they will know that most of the time this 'evidence' that copyright organisations present is pure bolony. I think nearly 2/3rds of all 'evidence' used against the Pirate Bay was thrown out of court and in many cases it was shown to be false. These copyright lawers are the scum of the earth, they will use any and all tactics.

token56

FloatingVoter wrote: »

The issue involves what you're downloading not how you're downloading it. Filesharing and using p2p networks are completely legal. Its the downloading of copyrighted content that is the issue. So if you're using rapidshare to download copyrighted material then yes, the case does concern you.

Not true to the best of my knowledge, this seems to be only targeting p2p traffic, not http or ftp traffic which is what filesharing sites generally are. Thats not to say they are completely safe but it would be difficult to determine if something illegal is being downloaded via http without sniffing the traffic which, as has already been said, is illegal.

mp3ireland2

Downloaded peerblock which blocks certain ip's from seeing you.. there is a list which is updated, don't no how good it is and if this list is relevant to Ireland. It blocks out a lot of websites such as bbc though (only expample if found before I turned it off) so I will just use it when downloading and leave it off the rest of the time....

also, on vuze you can encrypt torrents, this seemily reduces inter client compatability, but I wonder is it much safer fro downlaoding discreetly....

Anybody have any info on either of these...

teddy b123

Downloaded peerblock which blocks certain ip's from seeing you

Yeah, its good but its far from perfect, you will eventually get caught out so its only delaying the inevitable

also, on vuze you can encrypt torrents, this seemily reduces inter client compatability, but I wonder is it much safer fro downlaoding discreetly....

Encrypting wouldnt help unless they (the isp) start monitoring traffic which eircom said is not gonna happen

eircom will not monitor customer’s activities at any stage, nor will it place any monitoring equipment or software on its network in order to facilitate this block.

mp3ireland2

Cheers for that info teddy, no point in encrypting so... I've only jus signed up with eircom in feb as broadband only became available then, so am in contract for a year... but if they cut me off surely i don't have to pay and can jus get a new provider?!

Guess i'll take it easy on the torrents till I see if people start getting letters!

teddy b123

just get a vpn, you'll be sorted then

mp3ireland2

Thanks for the advice, knowing nothing about vpn's, are these hard to set up!? where is the best place to start for info? I'll get googling but if you are aware of a good guide i'd appreciate it!

EDIT: Was looking around and see that you have to pay for most of them, are there any free ones which offer a decent service that you are aware of? itshidden.com is one I was about to sign up for but figure I'd see if anyone on boards knows of a good one! I only have a 2mbps connection at best, normall about 1.8, so possibly bandwith with the free service may not be an issue? don't really know!

EDIT2: set up a free VPN with https://www.ultravpn.fr. To test it i tried watching setanta sport on the eircom website, didn't work :-) and then i went onto pirate bay - worked :-)
Was very easy to set up... now to test the download speeds I get... not so good.. speedtest.net only givin about 0.41 mb/s, so my speed about 1/4 what it was....